Literature DB >> 25475714

Residual deformity is the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy: a three-dimensional CT study.

James R Ross1, Christopher M Larson, Olusanjo Adeoye, Olusanjo Adeoyo, Bryan T Kelly, Asheesh Bedi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have reported residual deformity to be the most common reason for revision hip arthroscopy. An awareness of the most frequent locations of the residual deformities may be critical to minimize these failures. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purposes of this study were to (1) define the three-dimensional (3-D) morphology of hips with residual symptoms before revision femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) surgery; (2) determine the limitation in range of motion (ROM) in these patients using dynamic, computer-assisted, 3-D analysis; and (3) compare these measures with a cohort of patients who underwent successful arthroscopic surgery for FAI by a high-volume hip arthroscopist.
METHODS: Between 2008 and 2013, one senior surgeon (BTK) performed revision arthroscopic FAI procedures on patients with residual FAI deformity and symptoms after prior unsuccessful arthroscopic surgery; all of these 47 patients (50 hips) had preoperative CT scans. Mean patient age was 29 ± 9 years (range, 16-52 years). Three-dimensional models of the hips were created to allow measurements of femoral and acetabular morphology and ROM to bony impingement using a validated, computer-based dynamic imaging software. During the same time period, 65 patients with successful primary arthroscopic treatment of FAI by the same surgeon underwent preoperative CT scans for the symptomatic contralateral hip; this group of 65 patients thus fortuitously provided postoperative evaluation of the originally operated hip and served as a control group. A comparison of the virtual correction with the actual correction in the primary successful FAI treatment cohort was performed. Correspondingly, a comparison of the recommended virtual correction with the correction evident at the time of presentation after failed primary surgery in the revision cohort was performed. Analysis was performed by two independent observers (JRR, OA) and a paired t-test was used for comparison of continuous variables, whereas chi-square testing was used for categorical variables with p < 0.05 defined as significant.
RESULTS: Ninety percent (45 of 50) of patients undergoing revision surgery for symptomatic FAI had residual deformities; the mean maximal alpha angle in revision hips was 68° ± 16° and was most often located at 1:15, considering the acetabulum as a clockface and 1 to 5 o'clock as anterior independent of side. Twenty-six percent (13 of 50) of hips had signs of overcoverage with a lateral center-edge angle greater than or equal to 40°. Dynamic analysis revealed mean direct hip flexion of 114° ± 11° to osseous impingement. Internal rotation in 90° of hip flexion and flexion, adduction, internal rotation to osseous contact were 28° ± 12° and 20° ± 10°, respectively, which were less than those in hips that had underwent hip arthroscopy by a high-volume hip arthroscopist (all p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: We found marked radiographic evidence of incomplete correction of deformity in patients with residual symptoms compared with patients with successful results with residual deformity present in the large majority of patients (45 of 50 [90%]) undergoing residual FAI surgery. We recommend careful attention to full 3-D resection of impinging structures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25475714      PMCID: PMC4353554          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-4069-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  21 in total

1.  Acetabular labral tears: result of arthroscopic partial limbectomy.

Authors:  N Santori; R N Villar
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2000 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.772

2.  Magnetic resonance arthrography of labral disorders in hips with dysplasia and impingement.

Authors:  Michael Leunig; David Podeszwa; Martin Beck; Stefan Werlen; Reinhold Ganz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Hip arthroscopy utilizing the supine position.

Authors:  J W Byrd
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 4.772

4.  Prospective analysis of hip arthroscopy with 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  J W Byrd; K S Jones
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 4.772

5.  The relationship between diagnosis and outcome in arthroscopy of the hip.

Authors:  J A O'leary; K Berend; T P Vail
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 4.772

6.  Arthroscopic Hip Revision Surgery for Residual Femoroacetabular Impingement (FAI): Surgical Outcomes Compared With a Matched Cohort After Primary Arthroscopic FAI Correction.

Authors:  Christopher M Larson; M Russell Giveans; Kathryn M Samuelson; Rebecca M Stone; Asheesh Bedi
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 6.202

7.  Intraoperative Fluoroscopic Imaging to Treat Cam Deformities: Correlation With 3-Dimensional Computed Tomography.

Authors:  James R Ross; Asheesh Bedi; Rebecca M Stone; Elizabeth Sibilsky Enselman; Michael Leunig; Bryan T Kelly; Christopher M Larson
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2014-04-15       Impact factor: 6.202

8.  Persistent structural disease is the most common cause of repeat hip preservation surgery.

Authors:  John C Clohisy; Jeffrey J Nepple; Christopher M Larson; Ira Zaltz; Michael Millis
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Why do hip arthroscopy procedures fail?

Authors:  Ljiljana Bogunovic; Meghan Gottlieb; Gail Pashos; Geneva Baca; John C Clohisy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Recognizing acetabular version in the radiographic presentation of hip dysplasia.

Authors:  J W Mast; R L Brunner; J Zebrack
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  47 in total

Review 1.  Radiographic predictors of femoroacetabular impingement treatment outcomes.

Authors:  Ryan M Degen; Danyal H Nawabi; Asheesh Bedi; Bryan T Kelly
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-09-19       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Approach to a Failed Hip Arthroscopy.

Authors:  Michelle E Arakgi; Ryan M Degen
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2020-06

3.  When the capsule matters.

Authors:  Nicolás Fiz
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2015-05

4.  Dynamic Hip Examination for Assessment of Impingement During Hip Arthroscopy.

Authors:  Renato Locks; Jorge Chahla; Justin J Mitchell; Eduardo Soares; Marc J Philippon
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2016-11-28

5.  Does Removal of Subchondral Cortical Bone Provide Sufficient Resection Depth for Treatment of Cam Femoroacetabular Impingement?

Authors:  Penny R Atkins; Stephen K Aoki; Ross T Whitaker; Jeffrey A Weiss; Christopher L Peters; Andrew E Anderson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-03-24       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 6.  New perspectives on femoroacetabular impingement syndrome.

Authors:  Moin Khan; Asheesh Bedi; Freddie Fu; Jon Karlsson; Olufemi R Ayeni; Mohit Bhandari
Journal:  Nat Rev Rheumatol       Date:  2016-03-10       Impact factor: 20.543

Review 7.  Radiographic outcomes reporting after arthroscopic management of femoroaceabular impingement: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ivan Dzaja; Kyle Martin; Jeffrey Kay; Muzammil Memon; Andrew Duong; Nicole Simunovic; Olufemi R Ayeni
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-12

8.  CORR Insights®: Head-Neck Osteoplasty has Minor Effect on the Strength of an Ovine Cam-FAI Model: In Vitro and Finite Element Analyses.

Authors:  Andrew E Anderson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-09-02       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Cam deformity and the omega angle, a novel quantitative measurement of femoral head-neck morphology: a 3D CT gender analysis in asymptomatic subjects.

Authors:  Vasco V Mascarenhas; Paulo Rego; Pedro Dantas; Augusto Gaspar; Francisco Soldado; José G Consciência
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Is the Actual Failure Rate of Hip Arthroscopy Higher Than Most Published Series? An Analysis of a Private Insurance Database.

Authors:  Jacqueline E Baron; Robert W Westermann; Nicholas A Bedard; Michael C Willey; T S Lynch; Kyle R Duchman
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2020
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.